Added by Geoff Sauer on Sep 19, 2008.
Average rating: 3.00/5.00 (n=1)
 


Recently there has been some debate between deliberative democrats about whether the internet is leading to the fragmentation of communication into `like-minded' groups.This article is concerned with what is held in common by both sides of the debate: a public sphere model that aims for all-inclusive, consensus seeking rational deliberation that eliminates inter-group 'polarizing' politics. It argues that this understanding of deliberative democracy fails to adequately consider the asymmetries of power through which deliberation and consensus are achieved, the inter-subjective basis of meaning, the centrality of respect for difference in democracy, and the democratic role of `like-minded' deliberative groups. The deliberative public sphere must be rethought to account more fully for these four aspects. The article draws on post-Marxist discourse theory and reconceptualizes the public sphere as a space constituted through discursive contestation.Taking this radicalized norm, it considers what research is needed to understand the democratic implications of the formation of 'like-minded' groups online.
 
  View all 14 works published by New Media and Society  

Please share your rating/opinion of "Rethinking the Fragmentation of the Cyberpublic: From Consensus to Contestation".
 PoorExcellent 
The link to this work seems to be broken.

Copyright © 2001-09 by the EServer. All rights reserved.Add a Work | Update this Work | Discussion Forum | Habitués